Washington, D.C. — The U.S. Justice Department is facing significant challenges as a wave of departures and an unprecedented number of lawsuits strain its resources. With more than 450 court challenges to President Donald Trump’s policies on the docket, government attorneys are finding it increasingly difficult to defend against claims while managing heavy workloads.
Recent public court documents, along with insights from current and former attorneys, highlight the difficulties the department is grappling with as it navigates these extensive legal battles. Since January, lawyers have often requested deadline extensions, openly acknowledging to judges that they are overwhelmed and struggling to keep pace.
The Federal Programs Branch, responsible for defending various executive policies, has seen a dramatic attrition rate, with more than half of its lawyers exiting. This branch has taken on contentious cases, including those involving the administration’s ban on transgender military personnel and the Department of Government Efficiency’s operations.
A review of court filings reveals that in about one-seventh of these cases, at least one lawyer has either departed or been reassigned without formal notice. Notably, over 30 lawyers involved in immigration-related cases have withdrawn since the start of the year, reflecting the mounting pressures within the department.
Lawyers handling immigration matters have expressed frustration regarding the burden of balancing competing litigation obligations after losing multiple colleagues. Some have openly described their offices as “overwhelmed” by the continuous influx of new cases.
The Justice Department has not commented on the significant turnover of attorneys or the challenges faced in managing the caseload. Since Trump’s administration began, hundreds of lawyers have either resigned or been dismissed, with Attorney General Pam Bondi reportedly removing many perceived as misaligned with the president’s agenda.
The pressure for the current legal team has intensified; during a recent court hearing regarding the closure of the U.S. Agency for International Development, one attorney attributed the lack of evidence presented to an understaffed office handling a rapidly evolving caseload. Many employees are reportedly working tirelessly to meet the demands of their roles.
In particular, the Office of Immigration Litigation, originally staffed with over 300 lawyers, has struggled to maintain its effectiveness as it coordinates defenses for an array of cases. A former attorney indicated that the team has seen a depletion of expertise, undermining their capabilities amid rising demands.
David McConnell, a former director within the immigration office, resigned earlier this year after more than three decades with the department, citing untenable job circumstances. His departure underscores a troubling trend; many seasoned lawyers have left due to increasing workloads and diminishing institutional support.
The firing of Erez Reuveni, an attorney known for advocating immigration policies, has drawn considerable attention. Reuveni claimed he was dismissed after revealing that the government had mistakenly imprisoned an individual in El Salvador. His whistleblower complaint suggested misconduct at higher levels, although the Justice Department has denied any wrongdoing.
Many attorneys in the Civil Division are anxious that Reuveni’s dismissal signals a precarious environment where even established defenders of the administration’s policies can be easily replaced.
To cope with the heightened workload, some cases have been shifted to U.S. attorney offices, which may lack the specialized experience necessary for handling immigration-related challenges. This pattern is echoed within the Federal Programs Branch, exacerbating concerns about the department’s overall effectiveness.
Civil Division leaders are making efforts to recruit new attorneys, but they face an uphill battle in matching the expertise and experience that the department has lost.
This article was generated by Open AI, and the people, facts, circumstances, and story may be inaccurate. Any article can be requested for removal, retraction, or correction by writing to contact@publiclawlibrary.org.